Niall Ó Donnghaile (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and all our visitors. There is a fair amount to get through in terms of the contributions and in addition to them. I have a number of questions, which I wish to hone in on, with the indulgence of the Chairman. On Mr. Allamby's fourth point on citizenship rights post-Brexit and the rights that will continue to be enjoyed or will not be enjoyed, he is right in that regard but I would add on to that that a failure to recognise, implement or legislate for Irish citizens in the North sustains an inequality, in itself. I accept the point that we need to include and recognise all the citizens in the North. However, we also need to be careful that we do not leave a significant chunk of the population behind by not legislating for their rights in the current context.

The second point I wish to make is on Mr. Gormally's presentation and it touches on some of Professor Harvey's points around the basic assumptions of the Good Friday Agreement being undermined by Brexit. He is absolutely right. I have been saying that from the very start of this. The European Parliament's constitutional affairs committee said from the outset that Brexit would require an alteration of the Good Friday Agreement. This also flags the point that so many aspects of the Good Friday Agreement remain unimplemented in terms of our rights. He made a number of points about the constitutionally and practically insecure nature of our rights of Irish citizens who are resident in the North.

The points around the British Home Office, in particular, are pertinent and are live because of the de Souza case. I do not wish to go to deep into that because there is an ongoing appeal in relation to that case. The point around the possibility of the Home Office regarding citizens as British is not a presumption, it is happening. The de Souza case shows us that this is happening. The presumption is that people like the de Souzas and people like me and everyone in the North are automatically presumed to be British citizens, and that is the legislation that applies to them.

For me, who is nowhere near as eminent as our witnesses on these issues, that is in direct contradiction to the citizenship aspect of the Good Friday Agreement. The point was made about both Governments legislating but I do not sense an appetite within the British system to legislate for our rights given what it is inflicting on us at the moment. How does the Irish Government legislate or bring proposals forward that protect and uphold our rights as citizens? I have been asking it for a long time what our rights as Irish citizens are, beyond the holding of a passport, but it has not been able to tell me. Could our witnesses expand on some ideas around that issue?

On the issue of democratic representation and voting rights, that is, to continue to elect representatives to the European Parliament, my colleague, Martina Anderson, MEP, sought legal advice. The Irish Government could have provided the additional two seats allocated to Ireland for people who are resident in the North but it decided not to do so. Is it too late? Are there other avenues or examples where people may have the opportunity to elect people to elected fora outside of the jurisdiction?

I would like to ask all the witnesses, but, in particular, Mr. Allamby, about the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. The British Government is signed up to the charter. Limited and marginal as it is, it is probably the only protection for indigenous and minority languages in the North. Has any research or scoping been done, given the political dynamic around language issues and the demand for proper legislation? That is really the only thing we have. Are we in danger of losing that and what threat does it pose?